When the World Trade Organization talks collapsed in Cancun, Mexico, last month it was like a mighty giant had reeled, lost his balance and crumpled to the ground.
Those who feared or loathed this WTO giant cheered when they heard the thud. This included many civil society groups, peasant and small-scale farmers’ organizations and millions of concerned citizens.
It also included the delegations from many of the poorest, least developed countries in the world. These delegations were accused by United States Trade Representative Robert Zoellick of having tripped the giant by sticking out their stubborn “won’t do” feet instead of negotiating nicely.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Then there were those who had hoped to reform the giant’s marauding behavior. They had worked hard to try to clear the negotiating path of new obstacles such as the “Singapore issues” (investment, competition, trade facilitation and government procurement.)
Their advice to step more carefully around the agriculture market access and subsidy areas had not been heeded. When they tried to elbow the talks back onto the cut subsidies/liberalize trade agenda, the giant balked and lost his balance.
This group of developing countries, called the G22, was lead by Brazil, China and India.
And then there were those who have fed and encouraged the giant to his current size and strength. Having designed subsidy walls around their protected areas, with wide gates opening up the rest of the world to their exports, they were determined to see to it that the giant had room to bestride the globe and deliver the goods. This group, the Quad, is made up of the U.S., the European Union, Japan and Canada. They left the Cancun scene mightily surprised and angry.
The WTO drama is far from over. The giant is down but not out for the count. Low-level WTO negotiations are resuming in Geneva.
Should we be worried by the Cancun failure? That depends somewhat on what we think it will do to our economic and trade fortunes.
But it mainly depends on what we value.
Beyond the good news that global trade has increased exponentially since the WTO came into effect, there are some other important outcomes.
First, as Canadian farmers well know, tripling agricultural exports doesn’t mean higher net incomes for producers. It’s more likely to mean lower prices and more volatile markets. It matters who benefits from all this trade.
Further, the WTO rules have opened markets and “levelled the playing field” very unevenly. Both the EU and the U.S. have actually increased their agriculture subsidies in recent years.
And, most importantly, the WTO has certainly not improved the lives of the poor. There is a growing gap between the rich and poor.
In a world awash in low-priced food, globalized markets are rapidly displacing farmers and increasing food insecurity. Peace, security, autonomy and well-being are being undermined.
Is it any wonder that a growing majority of peoples object to living with this giant?
Nettie Wiebe is a farmer in the Delisle, Sask., region and a professor of Church and Society at St. Andrews College in Saskatoon. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Western Producer.
